John Napier, chairman of the insurer RSA, makes a good point well. "If you compare the damage inflicted on the economies of the western world by polluted securities from the irresponsible, unchecked greed and avarice of leading USA international banks, there has not been the same personalised response in or from countries beyond the US," he told President Obama in an open letter on the subject of BP today.

Napier is factually correct: Obama's rhetoric has been wildly over the top at times. Some of the ideas voiced by the US administration are plain bizarre. The notion that BP should have to pay the wages of other companies' workers laid off by the moratorium on deep-water drilling is absurd. There is no point in trying to bankrupt BP. The interests of US citizens in Louisiana and other affected states would not be advanced.

But here's the other half of the story. Confronted by a president in search of an "ass to kick," BP does not help itself by presenting its backside so regularly.

The company's attempt to cling to its dividend is dumb dogmatism. Oil is still belching from the seabed. While that is so, nobody can estimate sensibly the size of the eventual bill, even to the nearest $10bn. It is reasonable in that situation for Obama to expect BP, notwithstanding the strength of its balance sheet, to suspend payments.

For BP also, suspending dividends would be sensible. It would demonstrate good intent to a sceptical US audience. The decision should have been made weeks ago. It's not too late.

Yes, the dividend is an important source of income for UK pension funds, as everybody knows by now. But let's have some context. "We estimate that UK pension funds' exposure to BP is about 1.5% of total assets, which are in excess of £800bn," says the National Association of Pension Funds.

The president is guilty of engaging in silly rhetoric but, on the substance of his criticisms of BP, he makes some fair points. David Cameron and George Osborne, struggling to construct a consistent line, should take note. Flag-waving is pointless. Stick to the substance, which would include advising BP's board to think again about the dividend.